It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Dubai police chief: US navy ship did not warn Indian fishermen

page: 1
6
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 19 2012 @ 08:21 PM
link   

Dubai police chief: US navy ship did not warn Indian fishermen


www.middle-east-online.com

DUBAI - Dubai's police chief has rejected US claims that a navy ship warned Indian fishermen to move away from it before firing and killing one of them after they failed to heed the order, media reported on Thursday.

(visit the link for the full news article)




posted on Jul, 19 2012 @ 08:21 PM
link   
Will Anderson Cooper on CNN speak about
this Dubai police report ? probably not


I have suspected that US was lying from the start on this
if this report is true then the Gov had to cover it up
and damage control with false report saying they have warn the boat before shooting it.. which was untrue
its to protect the military crew who probably have order
to shot first ask question later even if they are unsure of the threat level


The fisherman died and three others were wounded on Monday when the ship opened fire on their vessel near the port of Jebel Ali off Dubai in the tense waters of the southern Gulf.

The "Indian fishermen were not warned to move away by the US Navy," General Dahi Khalfan said, according to Khaleej Times daily.

"The crew ... told the Dubai police that they did not move towards the ship and instead attempted to avoid it."

"According to our findings and testimonies of the injured, I believe that they told the truth," the daily quoted Khalfan as saying.

On Tuesday, India urged the UAE to investigate the shooting.

Khalfan criticised the way the US ship had dealt with the incident, saying it had moved into international waters right after the shooting. Dubai police will deal with the case as a "murder," he said.

US defence officials said the fishing boat had ignored warnings not to approach the refuelling ship USNS Rappahannock, and that sailors on board the American vessel feared it could pose a threat.


India is powerfull .. probably more powerfull then Iran
why would the US piss them off .. they have nukes

www.middle-east-online.com
(visit the link for the full news article)
edit on 7/19/2012 by Ben81 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 19 2012 @ 08:25 PM
link   
OP your anti U.S rhetoric is well known on these forums so i won't comment on your bias, but i can guarantee that they were warned, if you knew anything about military procedure you would know there is no possible way a us navy commander fired on a ship without warning.

use a little comon sence before you decide to make yet another thread bashing the U.S military.



posted on Jul, 19 2012 @ 08:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by Gixxer
OP your anti U.S rhetoric is well known on these forums so i won't comment on your bias, but i can guarantee that they were warned, if you knew anything about military procedure you would know there is no possible way a us navy commander fired on a ship without warning.

use a little comon sence before you decide to make yet another thread bashing the U.S military.


A civilian from a friendly country was gunned down by the United States Navy. Are you not concerned in the slightest?

It's good to know you were on the vessel when this event occurred, willing to give eyewitness testimony no less. Good to know that every single instance in the military acts according to standard and absolutely never deviates from it ever, not in the history of the world, least of all the US.



posted on Jul, 19 2012 @ 08:32 PM
link   
reply to post by Gixxer
 





if you knew anything about military procedure you would know there is no possible way a us navy commander fired on a ship without warning.


It's well documented that US forces all over the Globe do NOT always follow Military procedure and have killed many innocent civilians because of it.

If you are saying that because the procedures are in place that there is no way something like this can happen...I'm a little shocked to say the least.

Peace



posted on Jul, 19 2012 @ 08:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by Gixxer
OP your anti U.S rhetoric is well known on these forums so i won't comment on your bias, but i can guarantee that they were warned, if you knew anything about military procedure you would know there is no possible way a us navy commander fired on a ship without warning.

use a little common sense before you decide to make yet another thread bashing the U.S military.


Unless you were there you can't guarantee crap. And if you think the military always follows procedure then you really don't know much about the military.



posted on Jul, 19 2012 @ 08:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by Gixxer
OP your anti U.S rhetoric is well known on these forums so i won't comment on your bias, but i can guarantee that they were warned, if you knew anything about military procedure you would know there is no possible way a us navy commander fired on a ship without warning.

use a little comon sence before you decide to make yet another thread bashing the U.S military.


If i though India was lying .. i would accuse them of doing so
but a dubai police officer that spoke to the victims and made a report
this is the result of his investigation
did US made any investigation ?? .. they went very fast saying they warned them
its the best way to excuse a murder

truth haters dont care ..no US military soldier were wounded in this incident
we are talking about the indian lifes here with 1 loss and 3 wounded
what you want me to do ? bash on the indian fisherman
i think the bullet bash them up enought dont you think

and i investigate by remaining neutral at all time
there has been a murder .. by finding the real truth is the right thing to do
to honnor the fallen one being murdered
the right thing to do is maybe not in your book but in mine yes



posted on Jul, 19 2012 @ 08:45 PM
link   
reply to post by Ben81
 

Iran has said one thing, the Navy has said another. They are both carrying out investigations. Neither has reported the results (as far as I know). I will not believe that a policeman has conducted and completed an investigation before Iran or the Navy has.

Besides, from your source:

"According to our findings and testimonies of the injured, I believe that they told the truth," the daily quoted Khalfan as saying.
He can't have come up with meaningful findings yet, so all the policeman has left is "I believe they told the truth." Do you have any idea how many believe the Navy told the truth?

I'm afraid this article contains nothing of substance.



posted on Jul, 19 2012 @ 09:01 PM
link   
there is an obvious gap in the situation here:

That the fisherman did not hear/receive any warnings (for the sake of the discussion) does not mean the USN didn't give any.

That the USN did give warnings (ditto) does not mean the fishermen received and/or understood tehm.



posted on Jul, 19 2012 @ 09:04 PM
link   
reply to post by charles1952
 


Iran ?
You mean India


you are quicker then Netanyahu
when he speculated and accused Iran right away
even before the Bulgarian autorities final investigation on the attack



posted on Jul, 19 2012 @ 09:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by Aloysius the Gaul
there is an obvious gap in the situation here:

That the fisherman did not hear/receive any warnings (for the sake of the discussion) does not mean the USN didn't give any.

That the USN did give warnings (ditto) does not mean the fishermen received and/or understood tehm.


Fisherman didnt hear the warning ... ?
you must be kidding right ..

Boat have huge alarm that you can hear from miles away
did they shoot in front of the boat with BB gun ? dont think so
they are loud and very splashy to be sure the captain see the bullet in front of him

your poorly attempt to excuse a free murder is shamefull



posted on Jul, 19 2012 @ 09:08 PM
link   
I don't get it doesn't the military always tell the truth and follow the rules?

Wouldn't the Government tell us the truth?

They wouldn't actually want to start a war, right?

government =
media =
tweaking =



posted on Jul, 19 2012 @ 09:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by Aloysius the Gaul
there is an obvious gap in the situation here:

That the fisherman did not hear/receive any warnings (for the sake of the discussion) does not mean the USN didn't give any.

That the USN did give warnings (ditto) does not mean the fishermen received and/or understood tehm.


I think if anything, in this case it is probably your latter assumption.

I realize no one in the navy wants to be "USS Cole'd", but an innocent man is dead. Did they do everything they could to stop this? How fast did it occur exactly; did he slowly sail into his death not heeding any warnings? Did they fire across the bow as a last warning.. ?

I find it hard to believe someone who is being shot at will continue to drive straight into it. Maybe the fiserhmen were completely scared.

Does this come down to whose life is valued more? The Navy has a presumption that they could die at any moment from an attack. Fishermen do not. The Navy takes a risk whenever it sails, they need to realize this and take it on the chin that sometimes not every wandering boat is a sabotage, and the sea isn't owned by the US Navy.



posted on Jul, 19 2012 @ 09:17 PM
link   
reply to post by Ben81
 

Dear Ben81,

Thanks for the response, but I don't think I meant India. My understanding was that Iran and the US started investigations but haven't completed them. But of course, I could be wrong. Assume for the moment that it was India and they have the results of their investigation. Surely, it wouldn't be announced by a police official, but by someone a little higher up the chain.

you are quicker then Netanyahu
when he speculated and accused Iran right away
even before the Bulgarian autorities final investigation on the attack

Forgive me but I don't understand this. I hope you don't think I'm accusing anyone in this matter? (Typed words can make clear communication difficult.)

With respect,
Charles1952



posted on Jul, 19 2012 @ 09:32 PM
link   
This was a tragic but avoidable incident.

It is common knowledge worldwide that the USN rules of engagement regarding small craft approaching unannounced have been modified since the bombing of the U.S.S. Cole


Rules of engagement (at time of Cole bombing)

The destroyer's rules of engagement, as approved by the Pentagon, kept its guards from firing upon the small boat (which was not known to be loaded with explosives) as it neared them without first obtaining permission from the Cole's captain or another officer.

Petty Officer John Washak said that right after the blast, a senior chief petty officer ordered him to turn an M-60 machine gun on the Cole' fantail away from a second small boat approaching.

"With blood still on my face," he said, he was told: "That's the rules of engagement: no shooting unless we're shot at." He added, "In the military, it's like we're trained to hesitate now. If somebody had seen something wrong and shot, he probably would have been court-martialed."

Petty Officer Jennifer Kudrick said that if the sentries had fired on the suicide craft "we would have gotten in more trouble for shooting two foreigners than losing seventeen American sailors."

USS Cole bombing






posted on Jul, 19 2012 @ 09:37 PM
link   
reply to post by Drunkenparrot
 

No it isn't common knowledge "worldwide". I guarantee you this dead Indian fishermen knew nothing of the rules of engagement of the US Navy "Post USS Cole". Otherwise he wouldn't have died so 'willfully', would he.

If this had been a US tourist killed by a foreign navy, the US would have retaliated and the rhetoric would be unbearable. It would certainly not have been labeled a "tragic but unavoidable accident".
edit on 19-7-2012 by SyphonX because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 19 2012 @ 09:44 PM
link   
The fishermen say they were speeding up to go around the ship...

Navy says they were in close enough proximity to cause concern...

Series of warning shots were ordered...

One of those warning shots (not a targeted attack) may have killed the boater.

It's a risk the Navy acknowledges, without acknowledging wrongdoing.


Link



posted on Jul, 19 2012 @ 09:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by SyphonX
reply to post by Drunkenparrot
 

No it isn't common knowledge "worldwide". I guarantee you this dead Indian fishermen knew nothing of the rules of engagement of the US Navy "Post USS Cole". Otherwise he wouldn't have died so 'willfully', would he.

If this had been a US tourist killed by a foreign navy, the US would have retaliated and the rhetoric would be unbearable. It would certainly not have been labeled a "tragic but unavoidable accident".
edit on 19-7-2012 by SyphonX because: (no reason given)


Sorry to break this to you but yes, it is common knowledge.



National Security

Current world events are touching our lives as never before. As a boater, you may be placed in a situation
that may put you in legal jeopardy, if not at risk of injury or worse.

Knowing how to act in certain areas or situations can not only make your trip more enjoyable, it can help
protect our country.

Naval Vessel Protection Zones

One thing you must contend with if you boat in certain areas of the country are Naval Vessel Protection Zones.
These zones are designed to prevent attacks against our navy by placing restrictions on how closely you may
come to a naval vessel.

The requirements are:

You may not approach within 100 yards of any U.S. naval vessel. Sometimes this is an impossible thing
to accomplish. If you need to pass within 100 yards of a U.S. naval vessel in order to ensure a safe passage
in accordance with the Navigation Rules, you must contact the U.S. naval vessel or the Coast Guard escort
vessel on your VHF radio. (Channel 16).
You must operate at minimum speed within 500 yards of any U.S. naval vessel. You must proceed as
directed by the vessels' commanding officer, or the official patrol.
Violations of the Naval Vessel Protection Zone are a felony offense, punishable by up to 6 years in prison
and/or up to $250,000 in fines.
Online boating safety guide



Subpart G—Protection of Naval Vessels
Authority: 14 U.S.C. 91 and 633; 49 CFR 1.45.

Source: LANT AREA–02–001, 67 FR 31960, May 13, 2002, unless otherwise noted.


§ 165.2010 Purpose.
This subpart establishes the geographic parameters of naval vessel protection zones surrounding U.S. naval vessels in the navigable waters of the United States. This subpart also establishes when the U.S. Navy will take enforcement action in accordance with the statutory guidelines of 14 U.S.C. 91. Nothing in the rules and regulations contained in this subpart shall relieve any vessel, including U.S. naval vessels, from the observance of the Navigation Rules. The rules and regulations contained in this subpart supplement, but do not replace or supercede, any other regulation pertaining to the safety or security of U.S. naval vessels.


Naval vessel protection zone is a 500-yard regulated area of water surrounding large U.S. naval vessels that is necessary to provide for the safety or security of these U.S. naval vessels.

Title 33: Navigation and Navigable Waters



posted on Jul, 19 2012 @ 09:53 PM
link   
reply to post by Drunkenparrot
 


Posting a US link does not show that it is common knowledge - there is more to the world than the US, and more to the world than the internet.



posted on Jul, 19 2012 @ 10:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by Aloysius the Gaul
reply to post by Drunkenparrot
 


Posting a US link does not show that it is common knowledge - there is more to the world than the US, and more to the world than the internet.


If you were operating a small vessel in the Dubai Port of Jebel Ali, would you approach a Naval vessel of any nationality unannounced?


Meanwhile, a Dubai fishing firm manager has told Gulf News he was warned to move on by a US vessel along the same shipping channel earlier this year.

Jon Viney, Manager at Ocean Active that specialises in fishing charters, trips and products in Dubai, said: “It happened about three times.

“When we approached a US vessel along the shipping channel in the Jebel Ali Port, we were given warning horns.

“One of the officials came to the front of the vessel and gave us another warning through hand signals.

According to guidelines, we aren’t allowed to go near the shipping channel so we turned around straight away.”

Now fishing industry insiders have called for clear guidelines on using the waters.

Jameel Abedin, Managing Director of Dubai-based Go Fishing Tours, said: “While there are guidelines in place in line with coastguard regulations, there has to be better communication regarding any new safety rules. This is especially important for private boat owners who may venture out to sea without updated guidelines.

The US Navy vessel gave no warning before firing — Dubai Police Commander


I guarantee the guidelines are the same for the U.S. port facility in Dubai as the Federal regulations I posted above.

It is the responsibility of the boat captain to be aware of the rules no matter how small the vessel.


edit on 19-7-2012 by Drunkenparrot because: (no reason given)

edit on 19-7-2012 by Drunkenparrot because: correction



new topics

top topics



 
6
<<   2 >>

log in

join